Skip to comments.How Rick Perry turned on the Tea Party
Posted on 06/02/2012 11:25:41 AM PDT by Qbert
Upon Chief Justice Taneys death, President Lincoln was tasked with replacing the Chief Justice of SCOTUS. Monty Blair had served as a loyal friend throughout Lincolns first administration. Likewise, Edward Bates had proven his loyalty to Lincoln over-and-over again. Both were well qualified men. Both greatly desired the position. Yet, in the end, Lincoln knew that there was but one choice that would best serve the Union. He knew that although Salmon Chase had essentially been dismissed from his Cabinet in disgrace and although Chase had been anything but loyal to Mr. Lincoln, Chase was an abolitionist and the one to right the wrongs of the Taney court and their Dred Scott decision. Lincoln understood that the personal relationships that he had built were not necessary what was best for the country.
Following the massive 2008 defeat of Republicans from sea-to-shining-sea, Senator Jim DeMint boldly decided that what the country needed was true conservatives willing to stand up to big spending republicans. He didnt make a lot of friends when he began endorsing insurgent Tea Party candidates through his Senate Conservative Fund, but he did make a difference. His Senate colleagues turned their back on him. But he pressed on and he helped fuel a conservative revolution that pushed the party and the nation in a rightward direction. He knew that the fate of the country was more important than the job security of some of his DC friends.
If only Rick Perry could grasp this concept.
During the Texas U.S. Senate primary, Governor Rick Perry was presented with two options ok he was presented with nine candidate options, but two true options for the republican nomination. The establishment man, the most powerful republican in Texas, David Dewhurst big spender, massive appropriator, earmarker, a guy who had more in common with the guys across the aisle, than the guys on his side of the aisle, or Jim DeMint and Sarah Palin backed Ted Cruz.
Perry chose poorly, he sided with Dewhurst. As Ive said a thousand times before. I dont have a problem with RINOs from Maine. I dont have a problem with liberal republicans like Kirk and Brown from Illinois and Massachusetts, but I do have a problem with a Mark Kirk coming from to us from Texas.
This isnt even to say that someone who works across the aisle is not to be desired. It is however, to say that someone who works with Ds more often than Rs would best serve the American people by staying in Texas.
Democrats dont nominate a candidate in the mold of Joe Manchin in California or New York. They nominate a Feinstein or Boxer. While it is true that a political party should be a big tent and allow moderates in, the moderates cant come from the conservative states (Im talking to you Lindsey Graham). We should elect moderates from moderate states and conservatives from conservative states. Moderates arent the ones looking to save the country by capping the debt ceiling, lowering spending, etc.
But, without thanks to Mr. Perry, Mr. Cruz the law clerk of William Rehnquist and a Hispanic American from the Harvard Law Review will now face off in a run-off election with Mr. Dewhurst. Again, we have the establishment wing of the party stuck in a different age while the Tea Party continues to find talent in minorities and ideals that win elections. Rick Perry might want to reconsider his strategy.
"Perry chose poorly, he sided with Dewhurst. As Ive said a thousand times before. I dont have a problem with RINOs from Maine. I dont have a problem with liberal republicans like Kirk and Brown from Illinois and Massachusetts, but I do have a problem with a Mark Kirk coming from to us from Texas."
Shoot, the GOP is set to nominate a liberal to run for President, so why shouldn’t Texas nominate one for the Senate race?
Actually, it is at least equally likely that Lincoln saw putting Chase on the court as an effective way of getting rid of a political rival.
Never forget that Cruz got only 34% of the republicans that voted to pull the lever for him in the primary. So more than just Perry must have seen the race differently or chose wrong.
Rick Perry has sided with Dewhurst only because Perry wants him out of Austin.
Actually to think that Cruz, who was unknown a year ago could get 34% in a race with a man who had been in the public eye for 11 years and in a race with 8 other people including a former mayor of the second largest city in the state so he had name recognition and even including Crag James who has name recognition if only sports name recognition
to go against all that and to get 34% is pretty remarkable. There must be something in his message that attracts people
and now that it is down to a 2 person race i will pay attention to what each offers.
"Never forget that Cruz got only 34% of the republicans that voted to pull the lever for him in the primary."
Yeah, in a race in which... nine people were running.
(And Dewhurst only got ten percent more than Cruz).
And, never forget that Dewberry couldn't even get 50% of the vote in the primary.
Perry is a democrat who switched parties...not ideaology. He is a cronygovernment guy. anyone that thought he was a Tea Party kind of pol was suckered.
Yep three candidates got a little over 91% of the vote with the remainder going to the other 6. All I’m saying is that the Cruz group didn’t sway much over 1/3 of the voters. That says something, what I’m not sure. Now he’s head up in the runoff and that will be a different ball game. But the primary race results still remain.
well Cruz will have 4 more votes with my daughters, wife and myself voting. I’ll do my part with texting, messaging and emailing all my friends and contacts that are friends to get out and vote. might even do a follow up phone call. Who knows? Might help get Cruz in.
Having said that, he's dead wrong on this one. He should NOT be supporting the Milquetoast Dewhurst. Don't know what he's thinking here
So was Reagan
RP is now showing his true colors as an entrenched, elitist Republican who believes that political cronyism is the way to go and cronies are the ones who should hold whatever office.
Yey you are correct but he had 10.4% more than his nearest competitor. The runoff will be a different race with a lower turnout and dependent upon which one can get their supporters out. It may well bode better for Cruz.
"That says something, what Im not sure.."
It says that the presumptive candidate wasn't able to get more than ten percent against an upstart. The momentum is with Cruz.
...course he will have to go back to his Democrat roots.
An important point that GWB never quite grasped.
Dewhurst has worked with Rick Perry for a long time. If he had not supported Dewhurst, Perry would have looked terrible. He had no choice. I voted for Cruz, but I also understood why Perry supported Dewhurst.
Cruz will destroy Dewhurst in a debate.
"RP is now showing his true colors as an entrenched, elitist Republican who believes that political cronyism is the way to go and cronies are the ones who should hold whatever office."
Yep. Underneath it all, he's basically a political opportunist who lacks true Conservative instincts.
He never left them. Many voted anyone but Dewhurst. Even with that, I'm worried he might get the votes especially with those lying political ads about Cruz. BTW, Cruz got two votes from this household and he'll get them again next time.
La Raza Rick continues to prove the arguments those who opposed his candidacy have been making about him. He is no conservative and he is certainly not on the side of the TEA Party.
You maybe correct. But we’ll know in 60 days what the voters will say not our speculating.
Perry would have looked terrible.
Is that kinda like situation when someone supporter McCain?
It’s a win-win for Rick either way.
If Dewhurst wins, he’s rid of him.
If Dewhurst loses and remains Lt. Gov., Perry can always remind him that he owes him a favor.
money and name recognition got Dewhurst about 45%. Cruz was a clear winner of the rest of the field, and built up his name rec in a relatively short time.
About what Romney got until everyone else dropped out.
So was Mayor Bloomberg, what is your point?
Perry’s got his pros and cons. In this situation, Perry is demonstrating one of his biggest weaknesses. While he’s a limited government kind of guy, he is no stranger to crony capitalism and the buddy system...scratch my back/I’ll scratch yours. It is prevelent in all politics, and definitely in the Texas Republican party. Here, Perry is backing his guy.
I don’t blame him for the endorsement. As others said, it is his Lt Governor, and to not do so would be poor. That said, he’s made some pretty strong statements (such as warning outsiders to stay out of TX politics), that shows a little more about Perry.
You are correct in that he got about 62% of the non Dewhurst vote. The question remains where will that other 38% non Dewhurst/Cruz vote go in the runoff. It will be interesting no doubt and generally when someone like Dewhurst gets forced into a runoff they’ll lose. Turnout should be lower and diehard supporters will have a larger impact which may favor Cruz. We’ll know in 60 days. I’m reminded of the AK Senator race a couple years back where a write in beat the primay winner.
Don’t confuse Perry with Reagan.
Reagan was a 1930s/1940s democrat, not an anti-Reagan democrat that only switched parties after HW Bush replaced President Reagan in 1988.
That’s what I get for going by memory, Perry wanted to replace Reagan with Al Gore in 1988.
A Perry thread means Reagan being dragged through the mud, Reagan last voted for a Democrat President in 1948, the WWII era.
Perry was wanting to replace President Reagan with an Al Gore Democrat just as Reagans administration was on the verge of Cold War victory in 1988.
43 posted on Wed Aug 17 2011 08:46:24 GMT-0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) by ansel12
the difference was regan started a revolution and Perry stayed ture to is core - Help your friends by spending gov. moeny with them. Not exactly the same life story. Maybe that is why Perry lasted one debate and looked worse in all rest - there is no there there.
Cruz for Senate: Texas GOP has a future. Dewhurst: Megayawn. If Texas has to settle for this useless elitist POS and compromise, compromise, compromise, then politics is useless and we need to destroy the GOP and start over again.
I wasn’t comparing Perry to Reagan. No one would be so foolish... I simply implied that converting from Dem to Rep many decades ago, in itself, doesn’t mean someone can’t be trusted, or can’t be a conservative... When Perry was a Dem, most conservatives in the South were Dems...
Thanks for you comment - I am not one of those who defends all things Ronnie, but what has upset me is what the Tea Party is all about...spending. Folks like Perry are “tough”on taxes until you see all the hidden ways people are taxed. The real TX tax rate is not low, and the money that pours in from property taxes and user fees is used to pay off insiders. I hate it in TX and in Washington.
Thanks. The only person in the past 20 years who could have come close to being Reagan-esque- if given the change, was Palin. Perhaps in 4 or 8 years, her star will rise again, as POTUS, and she’ll have an opportunity to prove it
I think that Sarah, a well qualified leader, is going to be more like Breitbart than Ronnie. She will make some unknowns members of the political class and they MAY do what is needed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.